Weekdays at 12noon on 770 AM: The Truth
Michael Medved

If the Private Sector Progresses but Government Stumbles, Who's to Blame?

President Obama drew fierce criticism when he told a press conference that, "the private economy is doing fine," but his defenders insist that his words should be taken in context. In the very next sentence, the president said: "Where we're seeing weaknesses in our economy have to do with state and local government-oftentimes, cuts initiated by governors or mayors who are not getting the kind of help they have in the past from the federal government…"

In other words, the president insists that the private sector prospers, even while government stumbles and struggles. But which part of the economy does Barack Obama influence most decisively? Even if he's right about "the private economy doing fine," he can hardly claim credit for that success, any more than he can escape blame for a sorry record of governmental failures.


MyNorthwest.com - Purpose of Comments statement
Bonneville Media encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comments can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior. We encourage your thoughtful comments which: have a positive and constructive tone, are on topic, are respectful toward others and their opinions. Bonneville reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

Comments (4)


  • Add A Comment

  • El Duderino wrote...
    Heads I Win, Tails You Lose
    "Everything that's great is because of me and my policies. Everything that is bad is because of Bush, the GOP, or is out of my control."

    That's all I've heard out of the President's mouth lately. Oh, and dirty jokes about his own wife.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • ron prevost wrote...
    Well, Hitler pulled it off. But Oz is nowhere near that good.
    The big lie. Keep repeating something often enough, and eventually enough people believe it.

    It's just like that '4,500,000 new jobs in 27 months'. repeated time and again as a good thing. While a minimum of 200,000 are needed each month to keep pace with population growth - we SHOULD have had at least 5,400,000 in 27 months. .... And 'unemployment is going down' when, in fact, too many workers are simply giving up even looking for work.

    Oz is only great and wonderful if we fail to notice the little man behind the screen.

    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • It's me! Ha ha! wrote...
    Well, not enough people are believing the lie.
    How are the Dear Leaders re immac chances today?
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • InaneSeattle wrote...
    Take it in Context?
    First, the Prez's comments are two independent statements - each stands alone and the other doesn't lend support or context to the other. A. the private sector is doing fine. B. the public sector, particularly state & local governments, are suffering greatly. {ahhh, boo hoo. So are the taxpayers carrying them on their backs.} Second, even IF the comments are taken together 'in context', both show his incredible delusion/ignorance regarding our situation. Is our unemployment 8+% (15+% real unemp.) really because state & local government are cutting back? Will state & local governments adding 200,000+ jobs PER MONTH really get us out of this mess and will that really be helpful or sustainable? AND, how will millions of new state & local government workers add to our GDP (the total output/production of our economy)? Remember no level of government CREATES output or anything contributing to GDP. And to assert that if public employees have $, they'll spend more which will require private industry to produce more and thus raise our GDP, then you really have an interesting (and insane) theory of 'Trickle-down Economics'!
    { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }
  • { "Thumbs Up":"1","Thumbs Down":"-1" }